zlatkob Posted June 11, 2013 Share #101 Posted June 11, 2013 Advertisement (gone after registration) I would say that this type of photography is definitely about being there. I have no problem with the critic's function, which is far removed from being there. A critic can educate and inform, and ask good questions. The problem is when the critic lacks real insight, and tries to turn positives into negatives, as if just to find fault. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted June 11, 2013 Posted June 11, 2013 Hi zlatkob, Take a look here On The Release Of Sebastiao Salgado's "Genesis" As A Book. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
Peter H Posted June 11, 2013 Share #102 Posted June 11, 2013 .............. ................ A critic can educate and inform, and ask good questions. The problem is when the critic lacks real insight, and tries to turn positives into negatives, as if just to find fault. This is certainly true. But its sometimes hard to appreciate how sincere and thoughtful an opinion is when its an opinion you strongly disagree with. We are all pretty much equally subject to the same fault of subjectivity when it comes to things we feel strongly about. Its human nature. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
IkarusJohn Posted June 12, 2013 Share #103 Posted June 12, 2013 But its sometimes hard to appreciate how sincere and thoughtful an opinion is when its an opinion you strongly disagree with. That may be - we are all human after all. But I'm not sure you can say that about the responses above to the Sischy piece. Mitch says, in his view, it is tight and well reasoned, and that it is a classic critique used in photography classes (I'm paraphrasing - please excuse me if I'm misconstruing what he says or selectively quoting his view). Zlatkob strongly disagreed. So, I read it with some care (being somewhat experienced in the use of language), and I felt that the piece had more personal motivation behind it than it warranted, and so I discounted it. I took the time to explain why in my posting. Ian went through a similar exercise. So please don't discredit those responses to Sischy's article by saying I strongly disagree with what she says. I have 30 years of training and legal practice to avoid doing just that. I don't strongly disagree with Sischy's opinion - had she said she doesn't like Salgado, or doesn't like his pictures, or she sees him as symbolising a wider problem in aestheticised, voyeuristic images of other people's misery, I would have accepted that for what it was. But she didn't say that - she cloaked her personal agenda in an academic critique, and she spoiled her piece by trivialising aspects of it. Picking apart critiques like this, and critically analysing what people say and why, is an important part of any dialogue. Damning by faint praise, or attributing subjective preference is uncharitable. I'm sure you didn't mean to do this. Cheers John 3 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter H Posted June 12, 2013 Share #104 Posted June 12, 2013 .......................Picking apart critiques like this, and critically analysing what people say and why, is an important part of any dialogue. Damning by faint praise, or attributing subjective preference is uncharitable................. ............ Agreed. But I stand by my point about subjectivity. We are all human, and we are all subjective to varying degrees, however well trained and/or well intentioned we are, and this can influence the way we react to criticism of things we admire. I do think this has happened in this thread, as its almost bound to do when strong opinions are expressed and challenged. Another point: Whilst Sischy's article has stimulated some interesting discussion, and I'm grateful for it, it has also slightly derailed this thread to a degree. I've repeatedly tried to explain why I'm not unreservedly enthusiastic about all Salgado's photography, even though I admire him hugely as a photographer. But it has been very hard, virtually impossible in fact, to talk about this in anything like an objective fashion without continually been dragged back and challenged on one of Sischy's observations. I'm here in this thread because Salgado is an important photographer and I'm interested in him and wanted to talk about his photography, not because I want to defend Sischy's article in every single post. I'd like to be able to talk about Salgado's photos without the polarising "for or against" effect that her article seems to have created here. 3 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
azzo Posted June 12, 2013 Share #105 Posted June 12, 2013 ... I'm here in this thread because Salgado is an important photographer and I'm interested in him and wanted to talk about his photography, not because I want to defend Sischy's article in every single post. I'd like to be able to talk about Salgado's photos without the polarising "for or against" effect that her article seems to have created here. Time for another round my friend. Grouse is what I have at the moment. Hope it'll do. Anyone cares to join, you're more than welcome. ... 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter H Posted June 12, 2013 Share #106 Posted June 12, 2013 Time for another round my friend. Grouse is what I have at the moment. Hope it'll do. Anyone cares to join, you're more than welcome. ... Thank you Ivan, what a fine idea.. A wee dram of Grouse and a blather with good friends will be the very thing! 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest malland Posted June 12, 2013 Share #107 Posted June 12, 2013 Advertisement (gone after registration) Can you make that Lagavulin? —Mitch/Bangkok Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
azzo Posted June 12, 2013 Share #108 Posted June 12, 2013 .. you're being difficult Mitch. ... I know they had Glenfiddich in stock last time I was in. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest malland Posted June 12, 2013 Share #109 Posted June 12, 2013 .. you're being difficult Mitch. ... It's the critic in me. If you've never tried Lagavulin, you should, but not in hot weather. —Mitch/Bangkok Bangkok Hysteria (download link for book project) Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
IkarusJohn Posted June 12, 2013 Share #110 Posted June 12, 2013 I have a bottle of The Macallan on my shelf, but it's too early in the day for me. I received the limited edition, two volume version yesterday (an indulgence, I know, but I won't get to see the exhibition). The crate is huge (weighing a colossal 60 kg!) The unpacking was great fun - foam, paper wrapping, a lectern to hold it. Oh, the anticipation! First impressions, aside from the shear size of the books, was the quality of the printing and presentation and the disappointment that the best images were full width, with the spine of the book running down the middle of the image. I guess that's a problem inherent in a book, rather than just loose images. After a few pages, it became less of an irritation, I guess. In terms of the images themselves, after a couple of hours I got through both volumes. My sense was that the order of the presentation was not coherent. I could not get my head around the order in which the images are presented - Antarctica one moment, and Kamchatka the next with no apparent theme. There didn't seem to be a journey I understood. I love the iceberg images, the desert images, and the people images - simply gorgeous. To my mind there were too many elevated landscape and textural images - nice, but too many similar images. My overall conclusion after one careful review, is that Genesis is a very ambitious project and there are many images there that I absolutely love. But, I'm not sure what impact it will have environmentally - I don't say that because there were no plastic bags, no oil covered birds or images of the North Pacific Gyre, but because it seemed to be incomplete. I can't say what is missing, but too many similar images, and not enough balance, leaving a lingering sense that there could have been more aggressive editing and there is a lot missing. I wouldn't begin to challenge Salgado's technique or his eye - of all photographers, his images are the ones I wish I had taken. Cheers John 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
azzo Posted June 13, 2013 Share #111 Posted June 13, 2013 ... I received the limited edition, two volume version yesterday .. John, My guess is, the second time round of viewing both volumes would be even better. Give it a day or two. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
charlesphoto99 Posted June 13, 2013 Share #112 Posted June 13, 2013 It seems to me that it's interesting to contrast Salgado's work to that of James Nachtwey, in that Nachtwey is also a "concerned photographer", and Alex Webb, chosen almost at random as I was looking at his latest book this afternoon. —Mitch/Bangkok Bangkok Hysteria (download link for book project) Mitch, I can tell you for a fact that Webb is anything but a "concerned photographer", in fact very far from the fact (I know this from someone who knows him). In fact he's mostly concerned with nothing but the act of photography and the "game" of aesthetics that arises from that. Much much more so than Salgado, who I think is one of the most powerful photographers of our lifetime and probably the only photographer to have created a nature preserve. I think the guy is pretty solid (I've seen him talk and was impressed). I've only skimmed this thread so far btw so probably missing something. Best, CP I c 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
charlesphoto99 Posted June 13, 2013 Share #113 Posted June 13, 2013 I can imagine many of Salgado's photos hanging on the walls of homes owned by people of taste and sensitivity. Nachtwey's less so, and to my personal taste, this is to his credit One of the more off putting things I've seen in photography was a Nachtwey show at a gallery in LA a few years back. Was it really necessary to do 4'X6' enlargements of Pakistani junkies and Vietnam Agent Orange victims (among other equally disturbing imagery) for sell for $5K apiece? I'm pretty sure it was to drive sells of 16X20 fiber prints as I have no idea who would possibly display one of these wall sized prints in their home (or business). But it faintly reeked, imo, and pointed out all the problems, concerns, and discrepancies when photojournalism, art, and commerce cross paths. I do respect and enjoy his photography, and of course it costs lots of $ to do what he does, but sometimes less is more. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wattsy Posted June 13, 2013 Share #114 Posted June 13, 2013 Yes, I was surprised Mitch offered Alex Webb as an example of a "concerned photographer". I've always viewed Webb primarily as a photographer from the HCB, slightly surreal, "decisive moment" school. A great photographic artist who is supremely skilled at creating very intricate, multi-layered, compositions that are very impressive examples of photography that, ultimately, don't say a great deal about the situation or subject depicted. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest malland Posted June 13, 2013 Share #115 Posted June 13, 2013 Mitch, I can tell you for a fact that Webb is anything but a "concerned photographer", in fact very far from the fact (I know this from someone who knows him). In fact he's mostly concerned with nothing but the act of photography and the "game" of aesthetics that arises from that. Much much more so than Salgado, who I think is one of the most powerful photographers of our lifetime and probably the only photographer to have created a nature preserve. I think the guy is pretty solid (I've seen him talk and was impressed). I've only skimmed this thread so far btw so probably missing something. Best, CP I c Charles, the main issues under discussion (the part I've been involved in) has been the Ingrid Sischy New Yorker article, which I provided a link on post #23 on page 2. Some people felt that she did a hatchet job on Salgado, while I felt that it was an article that was worth reading whether one agreed with it or not, because it raises important and interesting issues about Salgado as a concerned photographer and has been an important document in this type of discussion over many years. —Mitch/Bangkok Paris au rythme de Basquiat and Other Poems [download link for book project] Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest malland Posted June 13, 2013 Share #116 Posted June 13, 2013 (edited) Yes, I was surprised Mitch offered Alex Webb as an example of a "concerned photographer". I've always viewed Webb primarily as a photographer from the HCB, slightly surreal, "decisive moment" school. A great photographic artist who is supremely skilled at creating very intricate, multi-layered, compositions that are very impressive examples of photography that, ultimately, don't say a great deal about the situation or subject depicted.Ian, you have a point. If you look at my sentence that Charles just quoted I added added, "... Alex Webb, chosen almost at random as I was looking at his latest book this afternoon... Obviously, I wasn't thinking very clearly when i added that sentence, but had Webb in my mind because I was thinking about his Kodochrome color and what I wanted to do with color shooting the M9. I was a bit distracted — "un peu distrait" (sounds better in French). But I don't agree that Webb photographs don't say much about the subjects depicted. I think some of his books on Haiti, on the tropics, actually say a lot. —Mitch/Bangkok Flickr: Mitch Alland's Photostream Edited June 13, 2013 by malland Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
charlesphoto99 Posted June 13, 2013 Share #117 Posted June 13, 2013 Charles, the main issues under discussion (the part I've been involved in) has been the Ingrid Sischy New Yorker article, which I provided a link on post #23 on page 2. Some people felt that she did a hatchet job on Salgado, while I felt that it was an article that was worth reading whether one agreed with it or not, because it raises important and interesting issues about Salgado as a concerned photographer and has been an important document in this type of discussion over many years. —Mitch/Bangkok Paris au rythme de Basquiat and Other Poems [download link for book project] Yes, I've downloaded it and hopefully can read soon. I might have been a bit harsh on Webb, but what I've related was pretty much straight from the horses mouth or so I was told. I do love his photographs one way or the other. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
zlatkob Posted June 13, 2013 Share #118 Posted June 13, 2013 One of the more off putting things I've seen in photography was a Nachtwey show at a gallery in LA a few years back. Was it really necessary to do 4'X6' enlargements of Pakistani junkies and Vietnam Agent Orange victims (among other equally disturbing imagery) for sell for $5K apiece? I'm pretty sure it was to drive sells of 16X20 fiber prints as I have no idea who would possibly display one of these wall sized prints in their home (or business). But it faintly reeked, imo, and pointed out all the problems, concerns, and discrepancies when photojournalism, art, and commerce cross paths. I do respect and enjoy his photography, and of course it costs lots of $ to do what he does, but sometimes less is more. I didn't see the show, but I have to ask, at what point does a print get too big or too expensive to remain tasteful? Is it wrong for photojournalism to become big art? Should it only be small art, or not art at all? If photographers want their photographs to get noticed, one way is to make them very large and expensive. If photojournalists want to survive, it is wise to look for income beyond the small amounts they get from news media. Few people have the funds or the space to collect $5,000 4x6-foot prints, but for some people $5K is a very small amount. If they have a large art budget, why only offer them smaller and less expensive prints? I'm impressed that Salgado is offering a collector's edition of Genesis for $3K to $9K. That is way beyond the budget of the people who are buying the regular edition for $60, which itself is not cheap. But I say, why not? More power to him. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
raizans Posted June 14, 2013 Share #119 Posted June 14, 2013 My feeling is that Salgado's work will not pass the test of time as well as the work of the latter two photographers, for the reasons that Sischy writes about, including the sentimentalism and the beauty of the pictures that work as packaged pathos, which is certainly not how Nachtwey pictures, or those of Webb, for that matter, work.] i always thought that nachtwey and salgado both "packaged pathos." what distinctions would you make between the two? disclaimer: i've disapproved of nachtwey ever since 9/11. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
zlatkob Posted June 14, 2013 Share #120 Posted June 14, 2013 i always thought that nachtwey and salgado both "packaged pathos." Photographs have to show something. What did you want them to show? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.